Is it time to unify both degree names, yet?

[MedPR]

---

Members do not see this ad.

This is true. However, in the end, the MD schools are more GPA selective than DO schools by a slight amount.

I don't think we can make an accurate assessment of who is a bigger GPA (or MCAT) ***** since each has a different pool of applicants.

If DO schools had the same pool of applicants as MD schools (like if MD didn't exist), do you think DO schools would still be matriculating 3.5/26 people? I don't.

People in pre-osteo like to say that DO schools care more about life experience/ECs, but what they don't realize is there are thousands of 3.7/30+ students (non-trads included) who have just as much, if not more, life experience as a 3.5/26. There just aren't as many of them applying DO because they are all applying MD only.

 

[IslandStyle808]

I don't think we can make an accurate assessment of who is a bigger GPA (or MCAT) ***** since each has a different pool of applicants.

If DO schools had the same pool of applicants as MD schools (like if MD didn't exist), do you think DO schools would still be matriculating 3.5/27 people? I don't.

This is probably the best I can do

Osteopathic schools

Applicant data

http://www.aacom.org/data/applicantsmatriculants/Documents/2011-Applicants.pdf

look at page 5

Matriculant data

http://www.aacom.org/data/applicantsmatriculants/Documents/2011Matriculantsummary.pdf

look at page 5

Allopathic schools

Applicant and Matriculant data

https://www.aamc.org/download/321496/data/2012factstable18.pdf


Summary

Osteopathic schools

Applicant GPA (overall) - 3.43 (all GPAs included)
Matriculant GPA (overall) - 3.50 (all GPAs included)

Allopathic schools

Applicant GPA (overall) - 3.54
Matriculant GPA (overall) - 3.68

Osteopathic difference- 0.07
Allopathic difference- 0.14

Allopathic to Osteopathic ratio - 0.14/0.07 = 2 / 1

The allopathic schools are somewhat more selective.

 

[MedPR]

This is probably the best I can do

Osteopathic schools

Applicant data

http://www.aacom.org/data/applicantsmatriculants/Documents/2011-Applicants.pdf

look at page 5

Matriculant data

http://www.aacom.org/data/applicantsmatriculants/Documents/2011Matriculantsummary.pdf

look at page 5

Allopathic schools

Applicant and Matriculant data

https://www.aamc.org/download/321496/data/2012factstable18.pdf

Summary

Osteopathic schools

Applicant GPA (overall) - 3.43 (all GPAs included)
Matriculant GPA (overall) - 3.50 (all GPAs included)

Allopathic schools

Applicant GPA (overall) - 3.54
Matriculant GPA (overall) - 3.68

Osteopathic difference- 0.07
Allopathic difference- 0.14

Allopathic to Osteopathic ratio - 0.14/0.07 = 2 / 1

The allopathic schools are somewhat more selective.

I'm terrible with statistics, but to me that seems to support what you've been saying.

 

[IslandStyle808]

I'm terrible with statistics, but to me that seems to support what you've been saying.

Yeah I gotta work on the delivery but in the end the MD schools are twice as selective as DO schools. However, if you look at the GPAs by themselves, it seems like MD schools are only slightly more selective. I agree though there are also other selection factors at work.

 

[Dr.TurkandJD]

Most of the DO docs I know are very proud of their osteopathic roots. Some will vote for the merger, others won't care. However, the AOA is very vocal about keeping DO separate and maintaining the osteopathic philosophy. IMO, we should combine both degrees.

When you fill out application, it asks for suffix sometimes, most of the time there is no "DO" option, but just "MD". Do you think its wrong for a DO to put down MD, since DO option was not available?

 

[Textbookversion]

FYI merger doesn't need to happen in order for you to put an MD behind your name. Nor do new degrees need to be issued. There is no reason MD can't mean "doctor of osteopathic medicine."

All you have to do is lobby in one state to change the state law to allow DO's to use MD. Every state I know of has explicit provisions that say that anyone that is licensed other than a DO can use MD. All the docs with foreign degrees that are variants on MBBS around the world run around with MD after their name.

All it would take is one swipe of the pen on the state level. I'm not sure you'd get anyone lobbying against it either really.

 

[Textbookversion]

For example for AZ:

http://www.azleg.state.az.us/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/32/01853.htm&Title=32&DocType=ARS

"A person licensed under this chapter shall use the title "osteopathic physician and surgeon", "osteopathic physician" or "doctor of osteopathy" or affix the initials "D.O." after the licensee's name."

All you would need to do is add in ", or M.D." and you'd be golden.

 

[Temperature101]

I don't think we can make an accurate assessment of who is a bigger GPA (or MCAT) ***** since each has a different pool of applicants.

If DO schools had the same pool of applicants as MD schools (like if MD didn't exist), do you think DO schools would still be matriculating 3.5/26 people? I don't.

People in pre-osteo like to say that DO schools care more about life experience/ECs, but what they don't realize is there are thousands of 3.7/30+ students (non-trads included) who have just as much, if not more, life experience as a 3.5/26. There just aren't as many of them applying DO because they are all applying MD only.

I think DO schools are more MCAT ***** than MD...An applicant with 3.0 GPA and 30 MCAT might not find it difficult getting into a DO school. However, an applicant with 3.2 GPA and 35 MCAT will find it difficult to get into MD.

 

[IslandStyle808]

I think DO schools are more MCAT ***** than MD...An applicant with 3.0 GPA and 30 MCAT might not find it difficult getting into a DO school. However, an applicant with 3.2 GPA and 35 MCAT will find it difficult to get into MD.

MD schools win the MCAT ***** battle as well as the GPA battle.

 

[MedPR]

I think DO schools are more MCAT ***** than MD...An applicant with 3.0 GPA and 30 MCAT might not find it difficult getting into a DO school. However, an applicant with 3.2 GPA and 35 MCAT will find it difficult to get into MD.

I think both would have a difficult time, but I think even moreso the 3.0/30 for DO.

When I was waiting for my MCAT score (before I knew about URM), I told myself that I would apply only MD (and save money not applying DO too) if I got a 35+. My GPA is ~3.2.

 

[darklabel]

This post proves otherwise. I also don't follow how grade replacement negates the fact that DO schools are highly stat oriented.

Also, not everyone applying to DO schools has done grade replacement.

Because a 3.8 from a person who did grade replacement is seen equal to a person who has a 3.8 without grade replacement in AACOMA. How is that hard? The person who had a 3.8 without any grade replacement made sure they never screwed up than the person with grade replacement who screwed around freshmen year and than got their **** together and got A's from here on out (with grade replacement). The two GPAs aren't equal.

 

[Textbookversion]

Because a 3.8 from a person who did grade replacement is seen equal to a person who has a 3.8 without grade replacement in AACOMA. How is that hard? The person who had a 3.8 without any grade replacement made sure they never screwed up than the person with grade replacement who screwed around freshmen year and than got their **** together and got A's from here on out (with grade replacement). The two GPAs aren't equal.

What you'll find is that whether someone had their stuff together at 19 or not doesn't really have a big impact on how competent they are as an attending physician at 32. It also has nothing to do with intelligence.

You really shouldn't judge people like that. I had a supportive family and plenty of financial resources, and I didn't screw up my GPA. Plenty of other people come from diverse backgrounds, with difficult family situations and other responsibilities. Others lose themselves in the excitement and freedom of college life. I mean imagine coming from a repressive religious baptist family in the middle of redneck central, and finally making it to the big city, finally being free with other liberal minded people. For some people the first year of college is the first year for them being out of the closet on a number of fronts, whether it's their sexual orientation, gender identity, religious or political beliefs.

I guess what I'm saying is don't be a dick.

 

[Textbookversion]

Also people should stop ignoring my post that points out that MD could very easily stand for the people that are awarded a doctorate in osteopathic medicine just like it does for doctors with an MBBS or MBBCH. What acronym you use for your profession is based on state laws on licensing, not on what your school or the AMA or the AOA or anyone else says.

 

[NickNaylor]

Because a 3.8 from a person who did grade replacement is seen equal to a person who has a 3.8 without grade replacement in AACOMA. How is that hard? The person who had a 3.8 without any grade replacement made sure they never screwed up than the person with grade replacement who screwed around freshmen year and than got their **** together and got A's from here on out (with grade replacement). The two GPAs aren't equal.

Your undergrad GPA is number 943 on the list of things that make you a great physician.

(sent from my phone)

 

[PennDippody]

What you'll find is that whether someone had their stuff together at 19 or not doesn't really have a big impact on how competent they are as an attending physician at 32. It also has nothing to do with intelligence.

You really shouldn't judge people like that. I had a supportive family and plenty of financial resources, and I didn't screw up my GPA. Plenty of other people come from diverse backgrounds, with difficult family situations and other responsibilities. Others lose themselves in the excitement and freedom of college life. I mean imagine coming from a repressive religious baptist family in the middle of redneck central, and finally making it to the big city, finally being free with other liberal minded people. For some people the first year of college is the first year for them being out of the closet on a number of fronts, whether it's their sexual orientation, gender identity, religious or political beliefs.

Your undergrad GPA is number 943 on the list of things that make you a great physician.

+1

Pre-meds get so caught up on "how well you did the very first chance you had" as the decisions you make at 19/20yo are in any way relevant to the kinds of decisions you'll make much later in life. I believe the former is no indication of intelligence but, rather of preparedness. I suppose if we were all born and bread in academically conducive families and went to high schools that were proactive for college success, it could mean something different, but we are not. Second grades, post-baccs, and exceptional life stories are the only equalizers for those who otherwise cannot prove they have what it takes to even get a chance to make great doctors. In the end, we all have to do well academically. The time and effort one has to put forth to bounce back from a poor GPA via extra course work or alternative degrees is monumental enough, and shows an incredible amount of dedication to the cause. I'll also note that Adcoms (even LizzyM) will tell you that there is no evidence of those admitted with considerably lower GPAs (like those with URM status at times) doing poorly in either the pre-clinical or clinical years of medical schools. Those students often have much more to their story than simply grudging through four years of college on a whim.

As for this poll, until the schools are all under the same administrative control, standards, and curriculum, I see no reason to combine the degrees. Each type of physician, while equally licensed at all levels in the end, underwent schooling that was regulated by separate and distinct (not necessarily unequal) accreditation criterion. The separate degrees, therefore, should reflect this.

 

[NickNaylor]

+1

Pre-meds get so caught up on "how well you did the very first chance you had" as the decisions you make at 19/20yo are in any way relevant to the kinds of decisions you'll make much later in life. I believe the former is no indication of intelligence but, rather of preparedness. I suppose if we were all born and bread in academically conducive families and went to high schools that were proactive for college success, it could mean something different, but we are not. Second grades, post-baccs, and exceptional life stories are the only equalizers for those who otherwise cannot prove they have what it takes to even get a chance to make great doctors. In the end, we all have to do well academically. The time and effort one has to put forth to bounce back from a poor GPA via extra course work or alternative degrees is monumental enough, and shows an incredible amount of dedication to the cause. I'll also note that Adcoms (even LizzyM) will tell you that there is no evidence of those admitted with considerably lower GPAs (like those with URM status at times) doing poorly in either the pre-clinical or clinical years of medical schools. Those students often have much more to their story than simply grudging through four years of college on a whim.

Not to mention that it isn't uncommon for people to "bounce back" in med school and perform WAY better than they did in undergrad. There's a USMLE vs. MCAT thread in allo right now that demonstrates that: a few people posted with "low" MCAT scores yet absolutely crushed the boards. Past performance doesn't necessarily predict future performance. It's hilarious - but understandable because of their limited perspective - that people think stuff like GPA, MCAT, number of hours volunteering, etc. actually matters one iota or impacts your ability to become a physician.

 

[DrBumblebee]

Also people should stop ignoring my post that points out that MD could very easily stand for the people that are awarded a doctorate in osteopathic medicine just like it does for doctors with an MBBS or MBBCH. What acronym you use for your profession is based on state laws on licensing, not on what your school or the AMA or the AOA or anyone else says.

So, how come all US-DO school graduates have been awarded only with the "DO" after their names in the very same state where all other foreign medical school and US-MD school graduates have been given only the "MD"?

I only knew that the degree names were merely assigned according to which school (osteopathic, allopathic) you were graduated from.

Do you mean that it's as simple as making an application to your home state?

(Like foreign medical school graduates have been assigned the MD degree in a few days through only a simple online application to ECFMG.

From their website:

...ECFMG issued the first Standard ECFMG Certificates in 1958. Since then, it has certified more than 320,000 international medical graduates....

Dang it!.. 320,000 foreign medical school graduates working as MD in the United States?)

Can you provide with any actual sample(s) to support that your post is valid, and more importantly applicable?

 

[Narmerguy]

Not to mention that it isn't uncommon for people to "bounce back" in med school and perform WAY better than they did in undergrad. There's a USMLE vs. MCAT thread in allo right now that demonstrates that: a few people posted with "low" MCAT scores yet absolutely crushed the boards. Past performance doesn't necessarily predict future performance. It's hilarious - but understandable because of their limited perspective - that people think stuff like GPA, MCAT, number of hours volunteering, etc. actually matters one iota or impacts your ability to become a physician.

Well, it does impact your ability to become one since you have to get admitted, even if that doesn't determine how good you'd actually be as one 😉

If you could get the same "letters" from either school, I think you'd see the applicant pools start to merge together, with a lot more applicants for traditional MD schools applying for traditional DO schools as well.

 

[deleted127837]

First thoughts:

"Combining two groups that have historically opposed/different viewpoints? Nothing ever goes wrong there."

"What? It's not broken? Let's fix it. Certainly there are no bigger problems to worry about"

This would hurt lower-scoring applicants applying to the DO path, because no longer would lower-ranking MD-devotees/obsessees self-select themselves out.

However, it would allow us to stop (seeing) b*tching about this. Tough call.

The clear solution is to adopt a European styling, and everyone receives a Bachelors of Medicine/Bachelors of Surgery. Done and done. Deposit the money in the usual place.

Not to mention that it isn't uncommon for people to "bounce back" in med school and perform WAY better than they did in undergrad. There's a USMLE vs. MCAT thread in allo right now that demonstrates that: a few people posted with "low" MCAT scores yet absolutely crushed the boards. Past performance doesn't necessarily predict future performance. It's hilarious - but understandable because of their limited perspective - that people think stuff like GPA, MCAT, number of hours volunteering, etc. actually matters one iota or impacts your ability to become a physician.

Schools obsess over it (I'm assuming because rankings rankings rankings) so there's little way this perspective will change without a radical rethink to admissions processes. There's little use debating the existence or validity of hoops when you're still required to jump through them or fail.

 

[NickNaylor]

Well, it does impact your ability to become one since you have to get admitted, even if that doesn't determine how good you'd actually be as one 😉

Yes, you're absolutely right in that respect, and for that reason alone it's important. 😎 But I think people see high numbers/hours of ECs and think, "wow, that guy will be a great physician in the future," and thus people with apps like those are seemingly held as models for others to follow. There's definitely nothing wrong with having goals to strive for, but I think people take it a little too far and interpret success in medical admissions as predictive of your ability to be a great physician - ESPECIALLY when it comes to people that don't absolutely crush the admissions process.

 

[NickNaylor]

Schools obsess over it (I'm assuming because rankings rankings rankings) so there's little way this perspective will change without a radical rethink to admissions processes. There's little use debating the existence or validity of hoops when you're still required to jump through them or fail.

Don't disagree with the necessity of jumping through hoops, but I don't think that means we can't discuss their validity. At best the medical admissions process demonstrates that you're a hard worker and can succeed in things you're involved with. It provides insight into very general traits that will make you LIKELY to be a good physician, but it doesn't mean that you WILL be a good physician. And it's especially true that people that fail or otherwise don't do as well in the process can absolutely become great physicians.

 

[deleted127837]

Don't disagree with the necessity of jumping through hoops, but I don't think that means we can't discuss their validity. At best the medical admissions process demonstrates that you're a hard worker and can succeed in things you're involved with. It provides insight into very general traits that will make you LIKELY to be a good physician, but it doesn't mean that you WILL be a good physician. And it's especially true that people that fail or otherwise don't do as well in the process can absolutely become great physicians.

A ranking that somehow quantifies measures useful to judging how good physicians actually are might cause some momentum for such a shift. I don't know if outcomes would necessarily be the right tool, but something similar. Anonymized peer-rating (tied to schools and/or residency programs, and thus reflecting both) would be possible, but a massive undertaking, since nobody wants to sit down and give 150 of their coworkers ratings.

 

[notbobtrustme]

DO schools can already grant the MD degree. They simply have to get accredited by the LCGME.

 

[PennDippody]

DO schools can already grant the MD degree. They simply have to get accredited by the LCGME.

Same as my high school...🙄

 

[sinombre]

This is probably the best I can do

Osteopathic schools

Applicant data

http://www.aacom.org/data/applicantsmatriculants/Documents/2011-Applicants.pdf

look at page 5

Matriculant data

http://www.aacom.org/data/applicantsmatriculants/Documents/2011Matriculantsummary.pdf

look at page 5

Allopathic schools

Applicant and Matriculant data

https://www.aamc.org/download/321496/data/2012factstable18.pdf


Summary

Osteopathic schools

Applicant GPA (overall) - 3.43 (all GPAs included)
Matriculant GPA (overall) - 3.50 (all GPAs included)

Allopathic schools

Applicant GPA (overall) - 3.54
Matriculant GPA (overall) - 3.68

Osteopathic difference- 0.07
Allopathic difference- 0.14

Allopathic to Osteopathic ratio - 0.14/0.07 = 2 / 1

The allopathic schools are somewhat more selective.

These statistics don't tell you anything. We don't know how many osteopathic applicants received acceptances/matriculated at allopathic schools. Without that, the ratio means nothing.

 

[DrBumblebee]

DO schools can already grant the MD degree. They simply have to get accredited by the LCGME.

Proof?

 

[sinombre]

Proof?

I think what he means is that any school accredited by the LCME can grant the MD degree. In other words, LCME accreditation = MD. He's not making a claim that requires proof beyond this:

http://www.lcme.org/

It would be very interesting if an osteopathic school actually applied for LCME accreditation.

 

[DrBumblebee]

I think what he means is that any school accredited by the LCME can grant the MD degree. In other words, LCME accreditation = MD. He's not making a claim that requires proof beyond this:

http://www.lcme.org/

It would be very interesting if an osteopathic school actually applied for LCME accreditation.

From that website:

...The LCME is sponsored by the Association of American Medical Colleges and the American Medical Association...​

That is, AAMC + AMA.

Yes, it'd be too interesting to see osteopathic medical schools applying to LCME for accreditation. On the other hand, what prevents them from doing that?

 

[sinombre]

From that website:

...The LCME is sponsored by the Association of American Medical Colleges and the American Medical Association...​

That is, AAMC + AMA.

Yes, it'd be too interesting to see osteopathic medical schools applying to LCME for accreditation. On the other hand, what prevents them from doing that?

I don't think they have any (or at least not nearly enough) incentive to do it. Osteopathic medical schools and the AOA take a lot of pride in remaining a distinct entity.

 

[Mehd School]

From that website:

...The LCME is sponsored by the Association of American Medical Colleges and the American Medical Association...​

That is, AAMC + AMA.

Yes, it'd be too interesting to see osteopathic medical schools applying to LCME for accreditation. On the other hand, what prevents them from doing that?

The freaking AOA pressuring them along with the other DO diehards that keep whistling the "separate but equal!!" tune.

As it stands, I believe there are two DO schools immediately capable of handing out the MD degree upon graduation and choose not to. (KCOM and maybe MSU-COM? It's been a while since I read that literature)

 

[blizzah]

These statistics don't tell you anything. We don't know how many osteopathic applicants received acceptances/matriculated at allopathic schools. Without that, the ratio means nothing.

So you want to argue that DO schools are of similar selectivity as MD schools...😎

 

[Dr.TurkandJD]

The freaking AOA pressuring them along with the other DO diehards that keep whistling the "separate but equal!!" tune.

As it stands, I believe there are two DO schools immediately capable of handing out the MD degree upon graduation and choose not to. (KCOM and maybe MSU-COM? It's been a while since I read that literature)

Exactly, you guys are missing the point. It's not about the AMA/AAMC/LCME or the Government allowing DO schools to issue MD titles. Its about AOA and subsequently the schools, that do not WANT to issue the title. Many osteopaths are very proud of their differences. As Dr. Doback said, separate but equal.

 

[DrBumblebee]

I don't think they have any (or at least not nearly enough) incentive to do it. Osteopathic medical schools and the AOA take a lot of pride in remaining a distinct entity.

Well, if they assume that pride comes from the fact that their graudates were trained solely by US medical schools and facilities, although it's too chauvinistic, it's understandable. If someone has a DO degree then it's a US trained doctor. Period.

Foreign medical school graduates have been assigned the MD degree in a few days through only a simple online application to ECFMG.

...ECFMG is a private, nonprofit organization whose members are: American Board of Medical Specialties; American Medical Association; Association of American Medical Colleges; Association for Hospital Medical Education; Federation of State Medical Boards of the United States, Inc.; and National Medical Association.
​

Again, AAMC + AMA.

From ECFMG website:

...ECFMG issued the first Standard ECFMG Certificates in 1958. Since then, it has certified more than 320,000 international medical graduates.​

Dang it!.. 320,000 foreign medical school graduates working as MD in the United States? Now it makes more sense why we have too few DOs compared to too many MDs.

There's a wide leak in certifiying the physicians in this system, which should be standardized.

 

[sinombre]

So you want to argue that DO schools are of similar selectivity as MD schools...😎

Nope, I'm not arguing anything except that you can't support the claim that MD schools are more numerically selective of their applicants by using the given ratio. I'm sure the argument can be made in other ways.

I didn't apply to osteopathic schools so I can't provide any potentially useful anecdotal/experiential insight.

 

[Dr.TurkandJD]

Dang it!.. 320,000 foreign medical school graduates working as MD in the United States? Now it makes more sense why we have too few DOs compared to too many MDs.

There's a wide leak in certifiying the US trained physicians in this system, which should be standardized.

It's pretty pathetic that someone from Ross or Windsor or a low tier caribbean school or even a random school in Eastern Europe, India, Asia, ext will bare the title of MD, but an American trained physician gets a DO because of one OMM class.

DO=MD (if american trained), if foreign trained then make them a new title OR make them re-do clinical rotations+residency.

 

[FrontierPsych]

Maybe spend a little less time thinking of stupid ideas and a little more time working on your grammar.

Quality post. Keep up the good work.

 

[NeuroLAX]

It's pretty pathetic that someone from Ross or Windsor or a low tier caribbean school or even a random school in Eastern Europe, India, Asia, ext will bare the title of MD, but an American trained physician gets a DO because of one OMM class.

DO=MD (if american trained), if foreign trained then make them a new title OR make them re-do clinical rotations+residency.

Where do you think med students from the Caribbean do their clinical rotations? The ones with better reputations have clinicals in the U.S. Even the Queensland med school in Australia (which grants the MBBS) has affiliations for clinicals in the U.S. (New Orleans, LA). Perhaps you mean having ALL clinicals in the US (like US MD and DO)?

Also, we do not take just one OMM class, but I think you know that.

I remember reading earlier in this thread someone saying the OMM portion of the DO curriculum could be granted as a master's type of degree. This wouldn't work as I don't think DO school require 30+ credits of OPP. In fact, it is way less than that.

 

[Dr.TurkandJD]

Where do you think med students from the Caribbean do their clinical rotations? The ones with better reputations have clinicals in the U.S. Even the Queensland med school in Australia (which grants the MBBS) has affiliations for clinicals in the U.S. (New Orleans, LA). Perhaps you mean having ALL clinicals in the US (like US MD and DO)?

Also, we do not take just one OMM class, but I think you know that.

I remember reading earlier in this thread someone saying the OMM portion of the DO curriculum could be granted as a master's type of degree. This wouldn't work as I don't think DO school require 30+ credits of OPP. In fact, it is way less than that.

I love the osteopathic philosophy and OMM, that is one of the main reasons I would choose DO over MD if I was accepted into both. However, we will practically learn the same things as MD's plus more. Yes, DO students are more non-trad, you can argue they are older, more life experiences, and other things we all read on SDN, however both allo and osteo produce AMERICAN TRAINED PHYSICIANS. Both educations should be treated equal, and OMM should be an addition, i.e: John Smith MD, DO.


Caribbean students rotate in US, yes. But what about all those people that graduated medical school at the age of 23 in India, Middle East or Europe? Since in many countries there is no H.S, you go into professional training after 8th grade. There has to be a criteria, like only top tier caribbean can be licensed fully, but bottom tier need to go through extra training or a different licensure process. This leaves the question, who will decide the ranking? Who will decide the rules? Thats why the AAMC/AMA just gives away MD because its easier and more profitable for them. This process makes DO title more valuable. Anyone who finished medical school abroad can bare the title of an MD, but only a US osteo graduate can be a DO.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

DO schools can already grant the MD degree. They simply have to get accredited by the LCGME.

Coca forbids dual accreditation. So they can't, though we will see what happens in the future. The TCOM thing will be interesting and might set a precedent.

 

[NeuroLAX]

Coca forbids dual accreditation. So they can't, though we will see what happens in the future. The TCOM thing will be interesting and might set a precedent.

UNTHSC intends to open a brand new MD school, does it not? Wouldn't this then be a UNTHSC thing, not a TCOM thing? I don't think it will be any different than what is currently present at MSU or UMDNJ.

I'm interested to see what the fallout of the 2015 deal will look like.

 

[CrimsonKing]

As long as OMM, which is not in any way evidence-based medicine, is required at Osteopathic schools, there is no way that the LCME will accredit DO schools.

I have nothing against DO's and think they are fantastic physicians, but the title should not be the same when there is a significant amount of time spent on what is, as of our current physiologic understanding of the human body, pseudoscience being taught at DO schools.

 

[NeuroLAX]

As long as OMM, which is not in any way evidence-based medicine, is required at Osteopathic schools, there is no way that the LCME will accredit DO schools.

I have nothing against DO's and think they are fantastic physicians, but the title should not be the same when there is a significant amount of time spent on what is, as of our current physiologic understanding of the human body, pseudoscience being taught at DO schools.

Make sure you do your research before making absolute statements.

 

[DrBumblebee]

As long as OMM, which is not in any way evidence-based medicine, is required at Osteopathic schools, there is no way that the LCME will accredit DO schools.

I have nothing against DO's and think they are fantastic physicians, but the title should not be the same when there is a significant amount of time spent on what is, as of our current physiologic understanding of the human body, pseudoscience being taught at DO schools.

• Both osteopathic and allopathic medical schools in the US have science based pre-requisite courses for admission (physics, gen.chem., organic chem., biology, and even biochem/genetics.)
• Both osteopathic and allopathic medical schools in the US request MCAT scores from their applicants.
• Both osteopathic and allopathic medical schools in the US teach the same medical courses and techniques, with an addition of OMM course at osteopathic medical schools.

Walks like a duck, looks like a duck, sounds like a duck... Both are graduating the same type of doctors at the end.

 

[sinombre]

As long as OMM, which is not in any way evidence-based medicine, is required at Osteopathic schools, there is no way that the LCME will accredit DO schools.

I have nothing against DO's and think they are fantastic physicians, but the title should not be the same when there is a significant amount of time spent on what is, as of our current physiologic understanding of the human body, pseudoscience being taught at DO schools.

It's worth pointing out that there is at least some research that suggests OMM can be beneficial:

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199911043411903

http://www.jaoa.org/content/105/1/7.full

http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2474/6/43

http://archpedi.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=481422

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2848182/

I don't see any problem with teaching it, but it still doesn't seem to justify an entirely different degree.

 

[darklabel]

What you'll find is that whether someone had their stuff together at 19 or not doesn't really have a big impact on how competent they are as an attending physician at 32. It also has nothing to do with intelligence.

You really shouldn't judge people like that. I had a supportive family and plenty of financial resources, and I didn't screw up my GPA. Plenty of other people come from diverse backgrounds, with difficult family situations and other responsibilities. Others lose themselves in the excitement and freedom of college life. I mean imagine coming from a repressive religious baptist family in the middle of redneck central, and finally making it to the big city, finally being free with other liberal minded people. For some people the first year of college is the first year for them being out of the closet on a number of fronts, whether it's their sexual orientation, gender identity, religious or political beliefs.

I guess what I'm saying is don't be a dick.

I don't quite understand how my response correlates with my saying "GPA = Great physician" nor do I see how my response came off as "dickish". I appologize if I offended you, that wasn't my intent. Next time though, refrain from name calling when in an argument.

Adcoms know GPA isnt what makes a phyisician don't care. In MD it's a numbers game. You screwed up first year for whatever reason and if your GPA isn't around the averages, you're not likely to gain acceptance. I'm saying DO has a redemption factor in GPA saving that those who had a few screw ups that it can be fixed. MD doesn't have such remorse.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

As long as OMM, which is not in any way evidence-based medicine, is required at Osteopathic schools, there is no way that the LCME will accredit DO schools.

I have nothing against DO's and think they are fantastic physicians, but the title should not be the same when there is a significant amount of time spent on what is, as of our current physiologic understanding of the human body, pseudoscience being taught at DO schools.

As mentioned before my surgery residents, there are more than a few things in medicine done that are not scientific. That being said OMM does have some limited visible uses, obviously a good amount of it does not have any use or value, but others probably can be considered somewhat useful. The problem is that it's difficult to set up a study that can determine effect.

That being said, the LCME would only accredit the MD component. OMM can be completely seen as a secondary doctorate degree that is done side-by-side, similar to how some masters in anatomy are done in the first and second years of med school. So obviously there ARE ways around OMM as a barrier to accreditation.

I personally still believe that a merger is not only inevitable, but completely feasible without hurting anyone's ego. You just will have to cut OMM down a bit, make it a secondary doctorate at former DO schools and award both a MD and a secondary degree in Osteopathic Manipulation, or DO.

 

[Textbookversion]

This thread is giving me an headache.

YOU DON'T GET A DO OR MD DEGREE. The acronym is not something you are issued. Your diploma says doctor of medicine or doctor of osteopathic medicine. That is the degree you get.

Putting a DO or MD after your name is based on the laws in your state. That is it. It's a state law. Currently in every state those who are licensed using COMLEX after graduating from a school that grants a doctorate in osteopathic medicine use DO to signify their licensed status, and those who attend any other type of medical school and are licensed using the USMLE use MD.

AGAIN THIS IS STATE LAW. Holy crap there are so many premeds in this thread going "the AOA doesn't want to give out the MD instead of the DO" which is just a )(&**&)*&)()*&(ing incoherent statement.

 

[Textbookversion]

I don't quite understand how my response correlates with my saying "GPA = Great physician" nor do I see how my response came off as "dickish". I appologize if I offended you, that wasn't my intent. Next time though, refrain from name calling when in an argument.

Adcoms know GPA isnt what makes a phyisician don't care. In MD it's a numbers game. You screwed up first year for whatever reason and if your GPA isn't around the averages, you're not likely to gain acceptance. I'm saying DO has a redemption factor in GPA saving that those who had a few screw ups that it can be fixed. MD doesn't have such remorse.

I didn't screw up my first year, and I'm already in school thx premed. Still coming across as a dick. Totally missed the point as well.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

This thread is giving me an headache.

YOU DON'T GET A DO OR MD DEGREE. The acronym is not something you are issued. Your diploma says doctor of medicine or doctor of osteopathic medicine. That is the degree you get.

Putting a DO or MD after your name is based on the laws in your state. That is it. It's a state law. Currently in every state those who are licensed using COMLEX after graduating from a school that grants a doctorate in osteopathic medicine use DO to signify their licensed status, and those who attend any other type of medical school and are licensed using the USMLE use MD.

AGAIN THIS IS STATE LAW. Holy crap there are so many premeds in this thread going "the AOA doesn't want to give out the MD instead of the DO" which is just a )(&**&)*&)()*&(ing incoherent statement.

You do know that the state law is legislated by the separate AOA/AMA organizations that effectively feed into the central organizations right? You're trying to act like this is all disjoint, but generally the head does the thinking for the appendages.

 

[Textbookversion]

You do know that the state law is legislated by the separate AOA/AMA organizations that effectively feed into the central organizations right? You're trying to act like this is all disjoint, but generally the head does the thinking for the appendages.

State law is "legislated" by state legislatures. If you are trying to say that professional organizations lobby to create the status quo then yes that is a fair appraisal. But again it's not the degree that is preventing those with a doctorate in osteopathic medicine from putting MD after their name. It is the state laws.